I guess nobody doubts we've been rather irresponsible with our DHF spending so far, and I am glad we're finally having a broad discussion on this very topic. I understand we should fund projects that bring value (VP currently aims to deliver double the value of invested money; and I cannot wait to read and discuss the post they are about to publish on the topic), just like any company does. That's where the community meets business, I am afraid.
To be able to estimate the added value (and evaluate the outcomes in retrospect), projects should have, among other things, clearly defined KPIs, timeline, scope, responsibilities, etc. Is there any chance of adding these into the current proposal? I am sure it would be broadly appreciated. It will also add transparency, and perhaps make more people support it rather than rant about it.
I'm not too concerned about the current proposal, my opinion is of how some people are acting about our very small ask to save us from risks of losing a key dev that may make further development much more expensive. It's even more ironic when they're some of the most heavily funded people from the DHF and similar to our game have yet to show anything for it.
It's a game in the end, how many people it will bring to hive, how many hivers it will maintain is up to if people like it or not and the initial idea and tokenomics, etc. You're invested yourself, so clearly it's interesting enough for some people to get involved, hopefully even more outside of our shrinking ecosystem.
I know we (myself) aren't great at presenting things like a proper updated whitepaper, proposal, etc in some kind of professional manner, but that doesn't mean we're not trying to build something unique that's going to be cheap to maintain once it's launched and will bring value to the ecosystem by simply showing others how they can similarly build things with some help from the community (delegations/starter pack purchases) along with maybe some help from the DHF if they may really need it - as long as they have a good reputation, vision and idea.
We have enough fakers making things look pretty to eventually show nothing for it, I think, better to focus on building than making things appear professional or get in endless debates or completely surrender to manic stakeholders' demands who start panicking now rather than having been vocal about the obvious issues and overspending that's been happening for years now.